I found this discovery amazing. It lends more creedence to the idea that tools developed early in human evolution and this had a direct impact on our evolution. Indirectly this finding supports the idea that with tools a greater amount of protein was available in the diet and this in turn allowed the human brain to get larger. These larger brains then allowed more complex tools which netted even more protein etc.
As for the cognitive ablities of chimps they are quite advanced along the lines of a 7 to 8 year old child, though not quite completely equivilent. They have even been shown to be able to read if taught to. They can comprehend small words and phrases and can even reorder letters to create a word. So if they saw ACT they would reorder it to CAT to spell cat and then comprehend it. What chimps really need is a vocal system capable of producing the human range of sounds so they can communicate, organize, and overthrow us. LOL.
I really do find chimps amazing and think maybe I should have been a primatologist instead of an archaeologist.
hmmm.... I don't see how an animal can be dumb... dumb doesn't really exist, now does it? dumb is an abstract idea that we created to compare intelligence. I'm dumber than you, someone else is dumber than me, the dog is dumb because it's not a person ; how can we compare lesser genera to us? Even to compare extinct species of humans to ourselves and call them "dumb" is kind of dumb in it's self isn't it? "Dumb" animals are "dumb" because they don't need to be at the same level of intelligence as we are. If they did, they would have evolved, if they couldn't get there and needed to they would have died out. Look at dogs.. can't be that dumb considering we take care of them.
I wonder why we had to evolve to such a great extent.. why did we struggle and have to evolve while the other animals that were around the same time (the ones that are still alive today) didn't?
Did anyone get any of that or is it just a rant that only makes sense to me?
Makes sense to me.
The key reason that we're around and there's nothing else is simple.... competition. There were at times many, many human species at the same time.
Take for example the Neanderthals, aka Homo neanderthalensis. These intelligent homonids dominated Europe for a very, very long time, untill competition by the MORE intelligent Cro-Magnons (Homo sapiens) drove them to extinction.
We're not the only batch of upright intelligent beings to have evolved, we're just the most sucessful.
The evedence presented by this study alone is not Circumstantial by any stretch of the word. If such a large portion or the Anthropological community can be truly mislead by “circumstantial” evidence, that means one of tow things. Either it has some merit, or it speaks volumes of the legitimacy of a large segment of the much-vaulted Anthropological community.BERKELEY, CA —The veil of mystery surrounding our extinct hominid cousins, the Neanderthals, has been at least partially lifted to reveal surprising results. Scientists with the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and the Joint Genome Institute (JGI) have sequenced genomic DNA from fossilized Neanderthal bones. Their results show that the genomes of modern humans and Neanderthals are at least 99.5-percent identical, but despite this genetic similarity, and despite the two species having cohabitated the same geographic region for thousands of years, there is no evidence of any significant crossbreeding between the two. Based on these early results, Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis last shared a common ancestor approximately 700,000 years ago
In a paper published in the November 17, 2006 issue of the journal Science, a team of researchers led by Edward Rubin, director of both JGI and Berkeley Lab’s Genomics Division, reports the development of a “Neanderthal metagenomic library,” which they used to characterize more than 65,000 DNA base pairs of Neanderthal origin. Their results not only provide new information about Neanderthals, but also point the way to a new strategy for studying aspects of Neanderthal biology that would never be evident from archaeological artifacts and fossils.
I too have heard of those purported "hybrids" and several published studies have specifically debunked the assumption that they are true hybrids. The Separate species status is widely accepted and little disputed: recent genetic and skeletal research show that the Neanderthals were most likely indeed distinct species. It is pointed out that even if true hybrids existed, that hybridization is not proof that they were indeed the same species. Many Distinct species in nature can interbreed and produce hybrids, even when their species status is not disputed. Most Biologists now allow fore a more flexible interpretation of a species, knowing that separate species can and frequently do intebreed. Therefore, the argument that they could have inbread is not a valid one against species status
I sold also note that the CONSENSUS is widely that they were distinct species. "Circumstantial" It is certainaly not
However, these studies were based on analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), genetic material that lies outside the nucleus of the cell. Although mtDNA tends to remain preserved longer than nuclear DNA, it provides limited biological information. The vast majority of the genome is comprised of nuclear DNA, which contains almost all of the genes.
Nuclear DNA is where all the biology is,” said Noonan, a post-doctoral fellow in Rubin’s research group who holds joint appointments with Berkeley Lab and JGI. “If you want to understand how traits like language and cognition are encoded, you have to study nuclear DNA.”
Studying ancient genomes from fossilized material by directly sequencing the DNA, as has been done for the genomes of humans and other contemporary organisms, represents a major challenge. As a fossil ages, its DNA is degraded by chemical processes. It also becomes contaminated with DNA from the microbes that colonize both the fossil and its immediate environment, and by other organisms, including the humans who handle the fossil.
While a group led by co-author Pääbo is attempting to directly sequence the Neanderthal genome, Rubin, Noonan and their colleagues are meeting the fossilized DNA challenge with a unique solution that’s been described as a “targeted approach.” Essentially, they “immortalize” all of the DNA in a fossil sample into metagenomic libraries where individual fragments of the ancient DNA are propagated in microbes. The DNA propagated in the microbes can either be sequenced or specific sequences can in a targeted manner be specifically fished out of the library and studied.
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/Genomics-Neanderthal.html
The evedence presented by this study alone is not Circumstantial by any stretch of the word. If such a large portion or the Anthropological community can be truly mislead by “circumstantial” evidence, that means one of tow things. Either it has some merit, or it speaks volumes of the legitimacy of a large segment of the much-vaulted Anthropological community.
Many (including myself) believe that Neanderthals more than likely interbred with homo sapiens as some skeletal hybrids have been found
other say it was to cover larger areas with less energy expenditure
As for which was more intelligent, well thats hard to say. Neanderthals actully had larger cranial capacity by ~100cc which could mean a larger brain or could be a result of their more rubust bodies
Their biggest disadvantages seem to be a lack of a hyiod bone that would allow speach, though this is highly debated, and also a technological gap.
Scavenging has its issues too like the fact that any medium or large preditor could easily scare off or kill Australopithicus afarensis due to their size and speed advantages.